I love how sad Mark gets at 8:45, because he really is passionate about cinema, and he realizes how much of a debauchery of cinema this film and franchise is. Telling it like it is, Mark!
as much as i respect kermodes movie knowledge, he was a little bit wrong when he said sparrow wasnt meant to be a good pirate- in the first film, he was described as 'the best pirate I've ever seen' when he stole the navy ship
I like the cold open at the beginning before his review of On Stranger Tides as if to remind us of his genuine hatred of the previous instalment At World's End, that movie probably scarred him for life as far as i'm aware, aside from Inception Mark kinda lost his faith in modern blockbusters because they are more interested in making money than telling stories, he also wrote a book called 'The Good, The Bad And The Multiplex' which for the most part talked about modern blockbusters.
+MrSnowy665 i hope so, it was the most boring n confusing n longest bilge i can remember sitting through off the top of my head! Thank god i didnt go to see transformers 4
+MrSnowy665 It's like the Shrek sequels - OK to watch at the time if you turn your brain off, but awful compared to the timeless classic that was the original.
I see Simon got a special pirate T shirt especially for this review. Looking amazingly casual here. Congratulations on the Sony award Simon but Mark should have got one as well if there is any justice. I saw the 1st Pirates OTC film and that was so bad I wouldn't waste my money on the follow ups anyway. Nice to have my decision confirmed by the good Dr !
liked this more than the 3rd movie, remember thinking the plot was not as unnecessarily convoluted and confusing, but still can't remember a whole lot about it apart from Penelope Cruz's disguise as jack sparrow when they both meet and the section with the mermaids.
I see Simon got a special pirate T shirt especially for this review. Looking amazingly casual here. Congratulations on the Sony award Simon but Mark should have got one!
@Sshelly34213 Midnight was an example of RTD being reigned in, by lack of money, good I concede but its lack of flamboyance has less to do with a stylistic choice and more to do with budget
I agree with him - it was just one lengthy, futile experience this thing. So perfunctory and trite that it was just dull to watch. The action scenes were so torpid and the tacked on romance was ineffectual. There was no one to route for and even then with these flat, unlikeable people, the 'story' was just dramatically inert. I enjoyed the first but this one sunk like a stone. This year's Indy 4.
@Pepotamo1985 I have vague memories of watching Pirates 3 and being utterly perplexed throughout it. I enjoyed the first film as a simple swash-buckling one-off pirate film (even with the inclusion of Ikea Knightley and Orlundo Bland) but the franchise lost it's way miserably. And people said Cutthroat Island was bad!?
Pirates is RTD Doctor Who, lots of stuff happens in it, there's a strange, apparently charismatic, fit bloke in the lead who the stuff revolves around for good or ill but little else. Still better than Love and Monsters though and the Doctor Who Pirates episode come to think of it. And for the record I loved the third film.
@wraithkelso He didn't say "it's a fair ground ride" he said "it's a film based on a fair ground ride" the ride at Disney which the idea was originally based on.
Thank the bearded one for Kermode. There are so few intelligent, eloquent, astute and entertaining film critics out there. This review is far more enjoyable than the film itself.
@OliviaTheGeek Avatar is the exception because it was made partly to highlight how good 3D can be. Since then studios have churned out any old film converted to 3D.
@DontTouchMyVicodin I don't know much about it, but I know that the story for the 4th movie is adapted from the book, it doesn't have anything to do with the previous films.
Kermode often gives movies good reviews, even big 'mainstream' Hollywood ones. I guess the negative reviews probably get more attention, but I think he likes films at least as much as he hates them.
@RazorSnail absolutely correct, point is - its not 3D its just added layers to the picture, If I want to see that kind of effect, I'll go to a theatre and watch something total crap but it'll still be better than watching crummy movies being putting to 3D.
I never got the appeal of these movies. I disagree with Kermode on lots of things but he's right about the zero entertainment value repeatedly and cynically proffered in all these films.
It seems they tried to simplify the plot somewhat, maybe a little too much. I thought it was lacking the big CG event like the skeletal pirates of the first or the writhing beard of Davy Jones.
Pirates of the Caribbean 1: Good film, enjoyable and entertaining adventure and story Pirates of the Caribbean 2: Good funny moments, entertaining, but started to lose it's way a bit towards the end Pirates of the Caribbean 3: 3 hours of complete convoluted boring bilge which stretched out far too long, losing the plot in every sense, but the end battle was ok. Pirates of the Caribbean 4: Better than 3, but can't remember much about it
The mass child hanging is actually the best thing about At World's End. It's the only time there's any real sense of danger, and all good adventure films should have moments where things are nasty enough to get under your skin, so there's something genuinely at stake. The rest of that film is a mess though.
@wraithkelso I never said you have to take critics' views as gospel, but you don't have to whine when you disagree with them, either. I liked Pirates 4 too, although it was quite messy, but I still like Kermode and enjoyed this review.
I've been rewatching them recently. I found Dead Man's Chest to be awful, but At World's End I weirdly enjoyed a lot. Despite its absurd length, it didn't drag unlike either of the other 2.
I enjoyed it. For me, Jack Sparrow is so likeable that it can get me through the movie even if it's a bit rubbish and still enjoy it. Also Lovejoy as Blackbeard was great.
1st one was dumb fun 2nd one was so-so 3rd one was incomprehensible crap 4th one was ok but still nonsensical. What was the chalice crap? How did the characters learn about the convoluted ritual with european cups and a fountain of youth that is in America? They were just making shit up as they went along. This is a problem i have with a number of films these days - the plot often makes no sense and is only there as a vehicle for the stars or the special effects
Exactly,it's nothing.Incredibly boring. Even though: Liked the first,didn't do like there were really things happening. 2nd had some fun ideas,some nice setpieces and lot of nothing stuff. 3rd was kinda the same as the second but with some weird drama. I did enjoy the first 3,they still had an interesting universe(much like star wars prequels really,the world seems interesting). 4th started in London so it took it back to the real world and didn't have any amazing big stuff afterwards.
I enjoy his reviews, and I'm not interested in these films, so what follows is not Sometimes Kermode a downer on certain people. He hated the first two Harry Potter films and got interested once Chris "bean counter" Columbus stopped directing. Here the previous rants had been against Gore Verbinski, whose absence from the fourth film turned the review into a resigned shrug. What would have been his reaction to a Verbinski directed Potter film?
@CallumJStewart He didn't criticise because it had 'that' plot. His point is that there is too much going on plot wise and none of it has any meaning or import whatsoever. Have you never watched a film and thought the various plot strands were cluttered and detracted from the film ? A film can have too much pointless story to it. His main complaint was that he was bored by the film because it wasn't interesting or funny. Leave the film criticism to the professionals. Maltese Falcon indeed.
Kinda expected him not to rage too much about this one, after the meltdown on the third, heh. "A big empty nothing"? Honestly, I thought the first three were that as well. Even the first one was mediocre at best.
I liked the first Pirates but if you break it down, even that film didn't have a real plot. I guess the problem is that one of the worst insults you can say about a movie is that "this one's strictly for the most hardcore fans," which may very well apply to the series if Mark Kermode is correct, but perhaps we're nearly all hardcore fans of Johnny Depp.
I love all these basement-dwelling 14 year-olds who complain about Kermode's reviews. There is a reason that he was hired as a PROFESSIONAL film critic (once again, the key word there being "professional"). Do you know what that reason is?...Because he knows more about film that you do. Simples.
I like his review but Mark is wrong, Jack is supposed to be one of the greatest pirates. thats why he was captain of the perl and how everyone knows his name.
Remember how there was that great legend around Jack about how he escaped the island Barbossa stranded him on and used hair off his back to tie sea turtles together blah blah? It was all just a lie. He got drunk for three days and got lucky that a ship sailed by. Elizabeth saved him the second time by burning the beer barrels and getting the attention of the Navy.
3 minutes of the Doctor far better than 3 hours (feels like 300) of Pirates. I watched these films online just to see if they were as bad as Mark says. If it's possible, they are worse.
@Pepotamo1985 Hating these obviously terrible films is a surprisingly lonely existence - I even hear serious films buffs rushing to the Pirate's defense. And every time people bring up the box office or try to make it look like I just don't "get" pop culture (
@vibeuk2003 Well i havent seen that one, and it should be quite good i hear, but i liked Trans 1-3, i enjoyed them for what they are lame action movies with huge explosion, really a small and primitive plot.
@wraithkelso How is that even relevant? It may well be a theme park but it's just a choice of wording, I'm sure he wasn't intending to bash Disneyland.
I saw this in 3d and as well as the film being rubbish the 3d does nothing whatsoever. Ian McShane was easily the best thing in it. After the opening 15 minutes or so the story makes the film seem just as long as number 3. Johnny Depp - Ok Geoffrey Rush - Very Good Penelope Cruz - Pointless (a step up from ikea knightley)
